Restoration Quarterly Volume 24 | Number 4 Article 1 10-1-1981 The rP esent Indicative in Matthew 19:9 Carroll D. Osburn Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.acu.edu/restorationquarterly Part of the Biblical Studies Commons, Christian Denominations and Sects Commons, Christianity Commons, Comparative Methodologies and Theories Commons, History of Christianity Commons, Liturgy and Worship Commons, Missions and World Christianity Commons, Practical Theology Commons, and the Religious Thought, Theology and Philosophy of Religion Commons Recommended Citation Osburn, Carroll D. (1981) "The rP esent Indicative in Matthew 19:9," Restoration Quarterly: Vol. 24 : No. 4 , Article 1. Available at: https://digitalcommons.acu.edu/restorationquarterly/vol24/iss4/1 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at Digital Commons @ ACU. It has been accepted for inclusion in Restoration Quarterly by an authorized editor of Digital Commons @ ACU. VOLUME 24/NUMBER 4 FOURTH QUARTER 1981 ISSN 0486-5642 ResLor< aLfon aar< Le1<l&1 Greek Word Study* The Present Indicative in Matthew 19:9 CARROLL D. OSBURN Harding Graduate School of Religion Memphis, Tennessee In recent discussion of the interpretation of Matthew 19:9, it has been ventured by some that moichatai must mean ''continues to commit adultery" because the present indicative necessitates continuous action. That understanding seems to be based upon a statement by Burton': "The most constant characteristic of the Present Indicative is that it denotes action in progress.'' As is well known, though, ''mood'' con­ stitutes the most difficult aspect of Greek syntax, 2 and Stagg3 and Greenlee" have called attention to a number of serious abuses of Greek syntax in biblical exegesis. Accordingly, it is imperative that careful distinctions in linguistic usage be observed lest the appeal to syntax result in misinformation. With regard to Matthew 19:9, the appeal to the pre­ sent indicative to establish that moichatai must necessarily refer to con­ tinuity is not cogent based as it is upon imprecise understanding of Greek mood distinctions. Observing that in the present indicative no clear distinction can be drawn between ongoing action and so-called "punctiliar" action as is possible in the imperfect and aorist indicative, Robertson notes, ''it is not wise therefore to define the pres. ind. as denoting 'action in progress' like the imperf. as Burton does, for he has to take it back on p. 9 in the discussion of the 'Aoristic Present,' which he calls a 'distinct departure •Editor's note: Our readers have long expressed an interest in studies in Biblical languages reflecting on crucial, ongoing discussions in the church. We are pleased to an­ nounce that Carroll D. Osburn has consented to provide such studies on a regular basis. We commend Professor Osburn to you as a judicious and meticulous scholar. 1E. deWitt Burton, Syntax of the Moods and Tenses in New Testament Greek (3rd ed.; Edinburgh: T .. & T. Clark, 1898), p. 7. 2 A. T. Robertson, A Grammar of the Greek New Testament in the Light of Historical Research (Nashville: Broadman, 1934), p. 912. 3Frank Stagg, "The Abused Aorist," Journal of Biblical Literature, 92 (1972): 222-231. •J. Harold Greenlee, "The Importance of Syntax for the Proper Understanding of the Sacred Text of the New Testament," Evangelical Quarterly, 44 (1972): 131-146. 193 194 Restoration Quarterly from the prevailing use of the present tense to denote an action in prog­ ress.' In sooth, it is no 'departure' at all. The idiom is as old as the tense itself and is due to the failure in the development of separate tenses for punctiliar and linear action in the ind. of present time.''' In explaining the difficulty of relegating the present indicative to "linear" action, Turner 6 states, "In order to say I walk without reference to time, English can be unambiguous; not so Greek. It must use the indicative of the pre­ sent. Thus in Greek one seldom knows apart from the context whether the pres. indic. means I walk or I am walking. In other moods than indic., of course, the problem does not arise .... One must always bear that in mind for exegesis."' Thus, while it is true that in moods other than the indicative the pres­ ent tense denotes continuing action, in the indicative mood itself no distinction can be drawn from the mood between the action which is con­ tinuing and that which is not. By way of analogy, the familiar present indicative in 1 John 3:9 hamartian ou poiei, "does not continue to sin," derives its continuity not from the mood, but from the following hamar­ tanein, a present infinitive which cannot mean other than "is not able to continue in sin." Similarly, in 1 John 3:8, hamartanei, a present in­ dicative, is used to mean that "the Devil continues to sin," but the con­ tinuity involved derives not from the present indicative, but from the attendant ap arches, "from the beginning." Too, 1 John 1:7 is understood correctly to mean "the blood of Jesus his Son continues to cleanse us from each sin," but any attempt to base that continuity upon the pr~sent indicative is an abuse of Greek syntax. In this, as in the other examples, it is the context which must settle the matter of whether con­ tinuity is involved. 8 The indicative mood is normally employed in all Indo-European languages to denote a simple statement of fact, but it has a wide variety of uses, such as the present of customary action, present of general truth, conative present, futuristic present, oracular present, historical present, 'A Grammar of the Greek NT, p. 864. A. Thumb, Handbook of the Modern Greek Ver­ nacular (2nd ed.; Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1912), p. 119, illustrates the development of such a distinction in modern Greek with pegaino, "I keep going," and pago, "I go." 6N. Turner, A Grammar of New Tes-tament Greek(Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1963), III, p. 60. 1Thus dzeteite, "keep on seeking," in Matthew 6:33 and Colossians 3: 1 cannot be cited as parallel to the usage in Matthew 19:9, for those are present imperatives, not present indicatives. Such inattention to Greek mood distinctions would constitute an abuse of Greek syntax. 'See Steve McKenzie, "The Church in 1 John," Restoration Quarterly, 19 (1976): 211-216. Osburn: Present Indicative in Matthew 19:9 195 annalistic present, present for perfect, and past and present combined. 9 Robertson 10 notes that the most frequent use of the present indicative is the "descriptive present," the simple statement of a fact with no specific reference .to continuity. The ''iterative present,'' involving repetition, is not so frequent. Of the more than 700 instances of the present indicative in Matthew's Gospel, the vast majority of occurrences are "descriptive" with no continuity under consideration, as 3: 11 where baptidzo, "I bap­ tize,'' connotes no repetitive or continual action but is merely a declarative statement. Similarly, in 8:25 apollumetha, "we perish," can hardly refer to a continual perishing, and in 20:30, where, when the blind men heard that Jesus ''passed by,'' paragei must not be understood to mean that he continued to pass by. In such instances, the point at issue is not whether the action could conceivably involve continuity, but whether the present indicative necessitates continuity. Certain in stances of which there are several in Matthew, actually prohibit any no­ tion of continuity, as in 13:14 where a certain man sells his possessions and ''buys,'' agoradzei, a field, but it cannot be said that the man kept on buying the field. Such "aoristic presents" are a common usage in NT Greek, as in Matthew 13:4411 and 26:63. 12 Other uses of the present in­ dicative with no reference to continual action are the 93 occurrences of the "historic present" in Matthew, 13 such as 26:40 heuriskei, "he finds them sleeping," and 27:38 staurountai, "they crucify him between two." In only a few instances does the present indicative in Matthew involve continuity,_as 15:23 where the Canaanite woman, kradzei, "keeps crying out" for Jesus to heal her demon-possessed daughter. However, in most of these instances, it is difficult to envisage the intended continuity as inherent within the present indicative, for even in 15:23 the continuity is evident in the disciples' response to her continual pleading, which derives from the imperfect ekradzen in verse 22. In 17:15 where a youth is said to "often fall into the fire" the continuity is brought to bear in po/lakis, "often," rather than in the present indicative. Even in such cases as 10:38, where one is admonished to take up his cross and akolouthei, 'H. W. Smyth, Greek Grammar (Cambridge: Harvard Univ. Press, 1959), pp. 421-423, who notes on p. 414 that ''the present stem may denote the simple action of the verb in pre­ sent time without regard to its continuance." 10A Grammar of the Greek NT, pp. 879ff. 11 F. Riene<;ker,A Linguistic Key io the New Testament (trans. and rev. by C. L. Rogers; Grand Rapids : Zondervan, 1977), p. 38. 12 Robertson, A Grammar of the Greek NT, p. 865. 13 J. C. Hawkins, Horae Synopticae(Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1909), pp. 148ff. See also S. M. Reynolds, "The Zero Tense in Greek: A Critical Note," Westminister Theological Journal, 32 (1969): 68-72. 196 Restoration Quarterly "follow Christ," and 14:2 where the powers are energousin, "wo rking in him," the evident continuity still cannot be said to derive from the pre­ sent indicative. The actual use of the present indicative by Matthew, then, cor­ roborates Robertson's contention that "action in progress" is not ade­ quate to describe that linguistic phenomenon and that the context must decide in each instance.